Pax Americana vs Pax Sinica vs Multipolar World

[Strannik]

28 minutes ago, Josh said:

I've no doubt Russian manufacturing is up dramatically...30% of the proposed 2024 budget is defense spending. That doesn't strike me as a sustainable economic model.

1. You have conflated all power structures spending (and police in Rus is a federal agency)

2. Sustainable for 3-4 years easily with the current oil prices / trends.

3.   US spent > 40% of GDP (not budget) during WW2

[Josh]

10 hours ago, Strannik said:

1. You have conflated all power structures spending (and police in Rus is a federal agency)

2. Sustainable for 3-4 years easily with the current oil prices / trends.

3.   US spent > 40% of GDP (not budget) during WW2

Ok, we’ll check in 2-3 years from now and see how it’s going. The war will likely still be on.

[Strannik]

Russia will spend 6% of it's GDP on defense.  In a time of a war. Not the earth shattering amount.

Poland, for example, is planning to spend 5%.

[urbanoid]

Around 4% planned for 2023, as for the coming years... we'll see, depends on a shitload of factors.

[Strannik]

Yes, the World Is Multipolar.   And that isn’t bad news for the United States.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/10/05/usa-china-multipolar-bipolar-unipola

•  It’s a common misconception that multipolarity must involve many states of roughly equal capabilities (i.e., that it must be balanced). But in fact, multipolar systems are often unbalanced, with two or three big powers and several middle powers all jockeying for position
• Ironically, despite how easy it is to describe polarity, it’s hard to measure. One could use any single military or economic indicator to make the case that one state is rising or another is declining; some other indicator might suggest the opposite

The US plans to rerun the Cold War playbook, attempting to contain China’s rise and hoping that the strength of allies and partners can compensate for waning U.S. power.

Yet, in a more multipolar world, this approach is full of risk. By trying to organize a group of as many countries as possible in opposition to China, the Biden administration risks weak partnerships built on lowest common denominator interests: 

1. The war in Ukraine highlights this dynamic in practice: States that are willing—even eager—to work with the United States against China have often been less willing to commit to supporting the U.S. position on Ukraine. India, for example, is a growing part of the U.S. strategy in the Indo-Pacific but continues to import energy and weapons from Russia. Meanwhile, in Europe, Germany remains a close trade partner of Beijing while cooperating closely with the United States on Ukraine. A range of middle powers with divergent interests are not likely to form into a coherent global bloc, no matter what Washington wants.

2. Another risk of this “with us or against us” approach is that the United States could be taken advantage of by its own partners. Sometimes this takes the form of alliance free-riding, where allies pay less than others for the common defense. We see this dynamic today in NATO, where the Biden administration has vacillated between reassuring allies and admonishing them for insufficient spending. If U.S. allies believe that the United States has no other options, they are less likely to take such admonishments seriously.

Edited October 5, 2023 by Strannik

[Strannik]

On 10/4/2023 at 8:31 AM, urbanoid said:

Around 4% planned for 2023, as for the coming years... we'll see, depends on a shitload of factors.

You'll get there in no time it seems: https://defence24.com/defence-policy/poland-to-borrow-billions-for-defence-beyond-the-budget and it's all DEBT.   

Unlike Russia. 

So quite sustainable for RU, not so for PL and EU (if they ever get to such a build up which I am a bit doubtful)

[Strannik]

1 hour ago, Strannik said:

Yes, the World Is Multipolar.   And that isn’t bad news for the United States.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/10/05/usa-china-multipolar-bipolar-unipola

The United States should not retreat from the world stage but rather use the multipolar world to its advantage. Such a strategy would involve three core elements:

First, the United States should leverage, rather than suppress, the power of its allies. Instead of attempting to maintain the mind-bogglingly expensive military footprint of past decades, the Biden administration should stress burden-shifting, encouraging allies to take on a greater role in their own defense, thereby turning their economic power into military power that bolsters U.S. aims. Consider Eastern European countries increasing their military spending in the aftermath of the war in Ukraine: Managed properly, this transition could shift the distribution of power within Europe and leave the continent with a more sustainable defense—but at less cost and risk to Americans. (So far, nobody except Poland seriously bites)

Second, in a multipolar world, flexibility and openness are highly valuable. The Biden administration should be more open to entering into mutually beneficial trade agreements. The failures of the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership were not for lack of interest from the other participants but rather the U.S. drift toward trade protectionism. Rather than a race to the bottom in protectionism, what is needed now is a race to the top against China in trade. (Good luck with today's Congress)

Lastly, grand coalitions are far less likely to be effective in a multipolar world; the Biden administration should focus instead on bilateral and minilateral agreements centered on shared interests. The administration has already had some successes in this space, from the G-7 global minimum corporate tax agreement to the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue’s infrastructure agreement.

[urbanoid]

5 hours ago, Strannik said:

You'll get there in no time it seems: https://defence24.com/defence-policy/poland-to-borrow-billions-for-defence-beyond-the-budget and it's all DEBT.   

Unlike Russia. 

So quite sustainable for RU, not so for PL and EU (if they ever get to such a build up which I am a bit doubtful)

Poland's debt is around 50% of GDP, far lower than most of Western European countries. There's still room for quite a lot of growth until we reach stagnation* due to shitty demographics. Tbh making economic prognosis is hard af, as it depends on a lot of factors, some of them strictly political. 

[urbanoid]

4 hours ago, Strannik said:

(So far, nobody except Poland seriously bites)

Romania too.

[glenn239]

2 hours ago, urbanoid said:

Poland's debt is around 50% of GDP, far lower than most of Western European countries. 

Amateurs.  We're at 104%  

[Strannik]

China and Saudi Arabia navies conduct joint exercise

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3237401/chinese-and-saudi-navies-launch-joint-counterterrorism-exercise-against-backdrop-israel-hamas-war

 

Edited October 10, 2023 by Strannik

[JWB]

 

[Strannik]

 “We have definitely lost the battle in the Global South. Forget about rules, forget about world order. They won’t ever listen to us again.”

https://www.ft.com/content/e0b43918-7eaf-4a11-baaf-d6d7fb61a8a5

- Western support for Israel’s assault on Gaza has poisoned efforts to build consensus with significant developing countries on condemning Russia’s war against Ukraine

- western diplomats worried that the US was giving carte blanche to Israel to attack Gaza with full force. That had eroded efforts since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine to build consensus with leading states in the so-called Global South — such as India, Brazil and South Africa — on the need to uphold a global rules-based order, said more than a dozen western officials.

- “We have definitely lost the battle in the Global South,” said one senior G7 diplomat. “All the work we have done with the Global South [over Ukraine] has been lost . . . Forget about rules, forget about world order. They won’t ever listen to us again.”

-  because Russia is exploiting the crisis and saying, ‘Look, the global order that has been built after the second world war is not working for you,’

- “If you describe cutting off water, food and electricity in Ukraine as a war crime, then you should say the same thing about Gaza,”

- “We have to prevent Russia . . . supported by the Chinese . . . taking the initiative to use this against us,” said a senior western diplomat. “There’s a risk that at the next vote in the [UN] General Assembly on supporting Ukraine, we’ll see a big explosion in the number of abstentions.”

- “Europe has to hold the line here,” the minister said. “We were a bit of a mess to begin with but I think we’re better co-ordinated now in terms of defending fundamental rights and making sure we see both sides.”

[Strannik]

BRICS Pay structure  - a proof that Swift data  now doesn't show the whole picture

 

Edited October 27, 2023 by Strannik

[Nobu]

A Pax-Japan-USA-China alliance would shake the world.

[Strannik]

Lagarde: "... fragmentation of world economy into competing geopolitical blocks was complicating a task of policymakers.  I didn't know it would move so fast..."

 

 

[Strannik]

Speeches by the Chinese leader show how he was bracing for an intensifying rivalry with the United States from early in his rule.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/13/world/asia/china-xi-asia-pacific-summit.html?smid=tw-share

[Josh]

I’d argue he provoked an intensifying rivalry with the US.

[Strannik]

2 minutes ago, Josh said:

I’d argue he provoked an intensifying rivalry with the US.

From the standpoint of the hegemon anybody who is trying to contradict it's policies is "provoking".  It's all about pov.

[Josh]

Just now, Strannik said:

From the standpoint of the hegemon anybody who is trying to contradict it's policies is "provoking".  It's all about pov.

Xi could have continued China’s economic and military build up without a raft of antagonistic policies directed at the US or its alkies or the internal security measures that have western companies moving out of China. Wolf warrior diplomacy was completely unnecessarily provocative. Steps like the blatant militarization of the SCS bases and dramatic uptick in anti Taiwan demonstrations were going to increase tensions. US opinion on China is starkly down as a result, and the US government is bipartisan in its anti China efforts because annti China policies are broadly popular.

[Strannik]

1 hour ago, Josh said:

Xi could have continued China’s economic and military build up without a raft of antagonistic policies directed at the US or its alkies or the internal security measures that have western companies moving out of China. Wolf warrior diplomacy was completely unnecessarily provocative. Steps like the blatant militarization of the SCS bases and dramatic uptick in anti Taiwan demonstrations were going to increase tensions. US opinion on China is starkly down as a result, and the US government is bipartisan in its anti China efforts because annti China policies are broadly popular.

Yes, he could have chosen to "walk softly", but we don't know if there were political/internal party/internal populace facing PR reasons for this and it's all moot point now anyway...

Edited November 13, 2023 by Strannik

[Josh]

2 hours ago, Strannik said:

Yes, he could have chosen to "walk softly", but we don't know if there were political/internal party/internal populace facing PR reasons for this and it's all moot point now anyway...

Never the less the fact is Xi is paying a diplomatic price around the globe for his foreign policy decisions, regardless of the purpose of them. It isn't unreasonable for countries to try to contain China given it's stated goals or its tangible military behavior.

[Strannik]

 

1 hour ago, Josh said:

It isn't unreasonable for countries to try to contain China given it's stated goals or its tangible military behavior.

It's not unreasonable.   And they will be deciding is it worth for them to join the chief container or not.

Edited November 13, 2023 by Strannik

[futon]

The United States government recently stated it had thwarted a plot to assassinate a Sikh separatist leader in the U.S. and issued a warning to the Indian government. According to media reports, U.S. authorities say they successfully stopped a plot to assassinate Sikh separatist Gurpatwant Singh Pannun on American soil. Pannun is a U.S.-Canadian citizen and a prominent figure in the pro-Khalistan movement, which calls for establishing an independent Sikh state in northern India.

White House National Security Council spokesperson Adrienne Watson indicated that the administration is treating this issue with the utmost seriousness and noted it has been raised with India “at the senior-most levels.”

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said he hoped India “will take these real concerns seriously.” This recent revelation comes two months after Trudeau said his government had “credible evidence” of an Indian link to the killing of a pro-Khalistan leader in Canada. In June 2023, Hardeep Singh Nijjar was assassinated outside a Sikh temple in Surrey, B.C.

...

https://theconversation.com/alleged-assassination-plot-against-sikh-separatist-could-hamper-india-u-s-relations-218502

[Strannik]

UAE will use local currencies for oil trade instead of $

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/uae-officially-stops-using-dollar-for-oil-trades/ar-AA1kCMxH